Washington Votes Forum

Introduced in the Senate on February 20, 2009

Click here to view bill details.

I believe this to be a poor piece of legislation.  Studded, traction tires have been proven to be useful in certain snow conditions to prevent skidding and loss of control.  By having a better grip in certain snow conditions, it saves more vehicular accidents and, perhaps, death on our highways.

The key important thing about our highways is safety.  There is no sure-fire way to stop wear and tear on our highways forever.  That is, they all suffer attrition due to our tremendous volumes of traffic.  Therefore, repair and replacement is needed despite the kinds of tires we choose to have on our cars and trucks.

Heavy trucks and buses add the dimension of extra weight to the road surface which does probably more damage that many cars with studded traction tires.  Yet, we share the road with heavy vehicles because they are needed for transportation and commerce.

Lastly, the sale and installation of tires is a big business in our state and many choose the extra expense of studded tires.  The extra money from the sale of studded tires and the taxes that accompany those transactions provide much needed income for our state.  Is this the time to begin cutting back on state revenue from any source?  Each month the indebtedness of our state climbs as we scramble to get business back on track.  Any legislation that would prove counter to this goal should be thrown out.

On the contrary this is an excellent piece of legislation! Studded tires have been banned in Wisconsin for 40 years and they have the best roads in the nation. Saying trucks are the cause of the roads being tore up is a lame excuse. While trucks have a heavy gross weight they also have a huge tread footprint to spread that weight out equalizing the weight factor.

Studded tires are nothing more than a placebo and I believe cause as many accidents that they prevent, because drivers become complacent to their surroundings and drive beyond the limits of the studded tires. I have been driving for 30 years and have never used studded tires. There are superior products on the market to steel studs in your tires if you think you need better traction.

I say learn how to drive when it is slick, but If you cannot drive without steel spikes sticking out of your tires when it is a bit slick then stay home or take the bus. Got to go that bad? Chain up, but forget the studs that I hear eating up the pavement when it is raining or even on dry pavement. Pass this legislation!

thedeanofmen:

Pass this legislation!

 

 

Right, pass the legislation, put thousands of more people out of work.  Put the poor tire guy who gets to shoot the studs into the tires for minimum wage out of work.  Put those who work on the roads out of work.  Put those people who change the tires twice a year out of work.  After all this is a depression and WA state has to do it's job if the queen wants the bailout O promised her.

As for me, I'm going to keep my studded tires.

 

DK

Pass this and save the state hundereds of millions of dollars in wasted repairs on our highways from the destruction studded tires cause and use the money for needed expansion to our highway system like the North South Freeway in Spokane.

As for the argument about big trucks and busses, they are not a factor in the rutting of our concrete roadways. You can thank the studded tires for that.

There are alternatives to studded snow tires and they do improve traction in winter weather. Just like studs they aren't optimal for all winter conditions but they also don't tear the hell out of the roads. My point being that getting rid of studded tires does not necessarily mean people will run the same tires year round and put people out of work. This is just a common sense bill. At the very least studded tires should have a steep tax or yearly permit placed on thier use to make the stubborn people who still use them pay for thier damage to the roads. Another thing to look at is state such as Minnesota that get far worse winters than us but have studded tires banned.

Ban them or make them pay to use them

 

Cetta

 

 Do you honestly believe that the politicians will use the money for anything needed (like new roads) much less then anything east of the mountains?

Dream on...

 

DK

Studs damage roads more than necessary there are perfectly viable alternatives and no reason to degrade the condition of our roads in a way that studs do. Using studs is kinda like smoking sure it has bad effects but meh I like to do it so I'm gonna keep doing it. Its just ignorant. honestly I dont care what the money is spent on as long as its not wasted on roads that foolish people have destroyed prematurely due to their closed minded thinking about types of snow tires when its probably only about 25% of driver who are tearing up the roads and forcing all the other taxpayers to pay for it.

 

Cetta, you said if we use studded tires then let us pay for them.  Great, did you know we do that in an increase in excise tax anyways? 

What are the viable alternatives are you talking about, new innovative rubber in tires that on one can afford?  Years ago they had sawdust tires and walnut-shell impregnented tires, but was only used for postal vehicles, however the US government decided that studs were more effective so they quit making them.  Plus if only the postal vehicles were the only one using them, what does that tell you about the cost of such tires?

And, where do you get the 25% number?  Nowhere does that number show-up in any statistic, please authenticate.  As for your alagory between smoking and studded tires....  BULL.  Smoking is only good for paying taxes, it doesn't save lives like studded tires.  And, since you're so hot about paying for things, you will pay more in insurance because the Insurance board recognizes that studded tires do save lives and prevent damage, whereas other tires on the market do not.  I don't know about you but insurance costs are high enough already.

 

DK 

You do realize that studded tires only help in 1% of the driving condidtions during winter and actually reduce your ability to stop and manuver in dry/wet conditions due to the reduced rubber contact patch on the road surface. Since the dry/wet driving conditons are more prevelant that would increase the likely hood of accidents for people who are using studded tires. This is why snow tires without studs are a better option for winter driving. If there is icy conditions people shoud use chains which are easly removed when they are not needed. studded tires also give people a false sense of security which makes them feel like they have the ability to drive more agressively then conditions actually allow.

You are right the 25% is not a statistic but a personal estimate based on how many cars I see with studded tires in parking lots of the places I frequent. As for the “studded tires save lives” WSDOT studies have shown that the conditions that studded tire offer benefits occur around 1% of the time and under wet but not icy conditions traction is actually reduced. The viable alternatives I am speaking of are any sipped studless snow tire. I myself find all seasons to be more than enough and frequently even travel hours to ski hills. The whole point I am trying to make is studded tires damage the roads. So we should either stop using them or make the people who use them pay more money to use them so that money can be available to fix the damage they cause. I know you say that the money probably won’t be spent on roads but like I can’t totally prove that around 25% of the cars in my area run studded tires you probably can’t prove for sure that the money raised by a stud tax/permit/fee would for sure not be used for road improvements.

 

kenny63931:

If there is icy conditions people shoud use chains which are easly removed when they are not needed.

 

 

You have obviously never heard of "black" ice.  Ice forming on bridgens, overpasses and during foggy conditions when the tempreture is about 34 degrees. 

What are we suppose to do when that happens, get out on the side of the road and put chains on, with a top speed of 20 miles an hour, I'm sure that will make lots of people on the I-5 parking lot happy.

However, not that many people know how to put on chains, and chains are not that easy to take off.  As for the ability to drive more aggreseively then conditons allow, that has been happeining since Benz invented the internal combustion engine and there have been teenagers. 

DK

Cetta:

As for the “studded tires save lives” WSDOT studies have shown that the conditions that studded tire offer benefits occur around 1% of the time and under wet but not icy conditions traction is actually reduced.

 

As with any DOT studies, it is centered on Western Wa.  and don't really reflect the rest of the state.  As for the rest, sipped tires have proven not reliable on ice as tested in Consumer Reports a couple years ago.  In fact they reported the only unchained tire that showed any traction on ice are the studded kind. 

There are other kinds of stud available, and nylon studs are used on the East Coast.  Enough for traction and doesn't dig into the road.  Why not use those  instead of banning all studs.  That is cutting off your nose despite your face (the nose is about 1% of your face and you don't really need it).  Once again, those of us who use studded tires do pay more in excise tax.

Even if studded tires only saves lives 1% of the time, which car in a hundred will you pick to have the occupents die?

DK

Actually the study is an average of all of washington state as I read it, but maybe I'm missing the part where they say its centered In Western Wa. Also the 1% is actually less than 1% if you take into account how all of the studies of studded tires that I have read state that they have decreased performance in every category but that 1% of road conditions. Also it is impossible to predict if an accident caused by sliding on ice would cause fatality, and assuming that 100% of ice related accidents end up in fatality is a little skewed. Studless winter tires are made of softer compounds that can offer comparable traction to studded tires. tirerack.com has studies proving that some studless tires can out perform studded tires these tires may be more expensive I havent looked into that, but would the extra cost for the minority that run studs be less than the cost of repairing the road damage? The ruts caused by stud damage also endanger drivers during wet driving condition and increase the risk of puddling and hydroplaning on the interstates and highways.

Cetta,

Many conditions exist upon our roads in different types of inclement weather.  Light snow with black ice below seems to generate more potholes after the thaw.  Plus, even though I don't like to put on chains, I will put them on when advised to do so (over my studded tires).  We must assume that chains cause some damage as well.  My opinion is, when there are icy, snowy conditions on the roads, my main concern is my safety and the safety of my family.

 

I do not believe the 1% statistic you have mentioned at all.  WSDOT is not God!  Statistics can be skewed and other groups doing the same research may come back with different results.  I live near a hill and I can tell you that people with studded tires get up the hill and people with so-called "all weather" tires do not.  Studded tires are designed to chew into the snow and ice and do a good job.  I've been driving for nearly 60 years and I've seen other types of snow tires and some are practically worthless.

Someone made the statement that trucks do not do all that harm to our roadways, but I beg to differ.  When you have 80-90 thousand pounds on sixteen or eighteen over-sized tires, you are putting a lot of pressure on the roadway.  Notice that a lot of municipalities have limited access to overweight vehicles for just that reason.  My point is, we need the trucks on our roadways for commerce, but we all contribute to wear and tear on the highways.  I say, "fix the highways when they need fixing and continue to have our safety devices, like studded tires".

Cetta:

Actually the study is an average of all of washington state

 

 

As a rule of thumb, when you hear the average of WA state, think King County.

And you're right about some tires being better then studded, I've never disputed that.  But for the average driver who cannot afford $400 per tire, the best alternative is studded tires.

As I wake-up this morning to snow-covered roads, I am thankful for the AST I do have on the car and as I head out, I a slip on the ice going downhill, I'm thankful for the extra-traction studs give me.  But, I guess if you live in Seattle or Portland where they don't use salt for fear of harming the fish, and causing busses to hang-over the freeway, not having extra-traction is just part of life.

As for the increase risk on wet roads, isn't that what "driving to fast for conditions" tickets are all about?  You cannot legislate "common sense," however, I am sure that will be next in line.  I can see next year's bill.  No one is allowed to drive under icy conditions because that causes accidents.  As for the costs of road replacement.  IF the damage to the roads are the severe, don't you think you would see lane closures in Seattle after every winter rather than a few times over the years?  I think you follow the money on this one, you will see that rep who proposed this has no interest in the company that does road repair, rather he owns stock in some tire company.

WA state is becoming worse of a nanny state then California.  I support the recall of Gregoire!

DK

 Cetta

 

I can also see that I'm not going to convice you and you're not going to convince me, so I guess we can agree to disagree.

 

DK

DK,

I think you're right about Cetta!  But, thank God we live in a country where we can form different opinions and stick to our guns to defend them.

 

As I had mentioned in an earlier post, it will be a debacle if this legislation passes.  I do not know how many folks use studded tires at the present time, but I imagine it is a very high number.  I do not think they will give up these tires peacefully. :)  Those that believe in their use and feel safer with them, will not like to see them banned.  Again, economically, is it the right thing to do?  Nobody has spoken to the dollar figure that people invest to have studded snow tires.  Also, to "change out" to other snow tires might impose an extra hardship on families.  I believe our legislators should take a look at the entire picture.  I believe there are those like Cetta who believe that all of our roadbed damage is caused by studded tire users.  I don't!  Myron

Unclemy:

DK,

I think you're right about Cetta!  But, thank God we live in a country where we can form different opinions and stick to our guns to defend them.

 

As I had mentioned in an earlier post, it will be a debacle if this legislation passes.  I do not know how many folks use studded tires at the present time, but I imagine it is a very high number.  I do not think they will give up these tires peacefully. :)  Those that believe in their use and feel safer with them, will not like to see them banned.  Again, economically, is it the right thing to do?  Nobody has spoken to the dollar figure that people invest to have studded snow tires.  Also, to "change out" to other snow tires might impose an extra hardship on families.  I believe our legislators should take a look at the entire picture.  I believe there are those like Cetta who believe that all of our roadbed damage is caused by studded tire users.  I don't!  Myron

 

 Well Myron,

First of all, and most importantly, it is not neccessary to change your tires completely. They are snow tires with studs......take the studs out and son of a gun, they're still snow tires.  It is very simple to remove the studs themselves in just a few minutes using a simple pair of pliers and a small screwdriver. Very simple!

As far as economical, well just how economical is it to have to repave our regions roads constantly? Not to mention the cost to our natural resources.

Yes Myron, the roads are damaged by studs. Not all wear is caused by studs of course, but the roadways on the east side of the state are far worse than the west side road surfaces. As a matter of fact, check your driveway and garage floor if you use studs....any wear there?.......yep, thought so.

I live in Spokane, drive all winter long without studs, (I use a GOOD quality traction tires) and get around just fine. Just F-I-N-E fine. The trick  is..............slow down! Every year the first snow comes along and everyone plays bumpercars, till they remember to slow down.

Sorry Myron, they need to go.

 

lemming249:

First of all, and most importantly, it is not neccessary to change your tires completely. They are snow tires with studs......take the studs out and son of a gun, they're still snow tires.

 

Cetta, how many people do you think lived in Seattle during the last snow storm had only snow tires?  How many of those snow tires do you think gained no traction on ice-covered hills? 

How much traction do you think snow tires give you when you hit black ice?

I am glad you live in Spokane, however I think you ought to be realistic and move back to California.  More and more of us are tired of the Californication of Washington state, and more and more politicians that are Californicating our state will be voted out of office.

Oh, and just in case you're stationed in the Air Force, you really don't have a say in the politics of WA. That's not to say we don't appreciate your sacrifice, but, when you go TDY you will be gone and off to another state and you will not suffer consequences of what you write about.  But, thank you for your service... 

 

DK

 LOL at your assumption I was from somewhere else. Also why are you quoting lemming and responding to me?

I was born and raised in washington. Also I am not against "snow tires" I'm against studded tires because they damage the roads. The only "snow tire" is a studded tire is the biggest problem with this debate we are having and the reason studded tires won't be banned for a long time because people are too stubborn to try a studdless snow tire and see how well they work. I have driven vehicles with studded tires and studless alternatives and have found that in my own experiences studless snow tires help more often than studs. The too many people in the state think snow tire and studded tire are one and the same.

Also I think its sad that you would discount a servicemans opinion on the basis that he or she might not live here for the rest of his or her life. By that way of thinking you might as well discount anyone that hasn't lived here all their life or has even thought about leaving the state.

Cetta:

The too many people in the state think snow tire and studded tire are one and the same.

That is because the majority of the state is from Western Wa where the names are synomonus(?).  But you are wrong,  Studded tires gives more traction when you need it, on black ice, and on compound snow and ice.  Just because you very rarely get that in Spokane and in an area where it's level...  Makes me think you have no clue what you're talking about when you say other tires give you just as good as traction.  Albeit I've never driven on the $400 tires with the exotice rubber compounds, but that puts me in the majority I think.  Also, in your area studless tires are probably okay for you, but again, those of us in Western Washington that do have to cope with black ice, ice, snow, and hills, it is not.

If it were me, I'd use a horse all the time.  I live out in the country and only leave when I have to.  Perhaps in a couple of years I can do just that.  As for now, I have a round trip of 120 miles per day for school (I'm a late bloomer), and if the munificent O and queen christine can hold-off on capping carbon and taxing whatever they want to tax more of, then I can.  I tell you about my commute is because without the studded tires, there would have been times that not only couldn't I have made the trip but there are several times when I was able to avoid accidents in which other people without studded tires have swerved out of control in front of me.  So for you while it might be only pennies a day for the road repair, to me it has been a lifesaver more then once, I don't know nor do I care what price you put on your life, but, for me, whatever damage my little ford focus has done with studded tires is worth it.

Cetta:

By that way of thinking you might as well discount anyone that hasn't lived here all their life or has even thought about leaving the state.

Except for the leaving the state part, you're right!  Especially the Californicated, those that have voted to screw-up CA and have moved up here to do the same to WA.

DK

Why did you go back and edit you posts from Feburary DK?

We get our fair share of black ice in Eastern Washingtion too and traction tires and studdless snow tire work just fine. I've driven up to the montain to go sking many time on ice and haven't had no troubel keeping traction to go up the hill. As for livining in the contry requiring the use of studded tires, My grandparents live on a farm out in the contry too and have never used studded tire to get to and from town which is a 50 mile drive one way.

The WSDOT did do the studded tires study on I-5. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/biz/mats/pavement/PavementsStuddedTiresFinalv2.pdf

kenny63931:

Why did you go back and edit you posts from Feburary DK?

 

 What the hell are you talking about?  I haven't edited anything.  IF any of my postings are edited then I assure you  I didn't do it.

 

So, you've driven on a moutain road to go sking without problems, good for you.  I've driven through a blizzard without problems also without having snow tires.  Good for me.  And good for your grandparents for living on a farm.  And, while I'm busy handing out the goodfors, Good for me for floating my VW bug down mainstreet during the flooding when I was in High school over 30 years ago.  See, everything you have said is either disturbing (my posts being edited) or feelgood nonesense which is not pertinent to the matter of safety or minor road damage.  Just try to do a panic stop on black ice with your snow tires and see what happens, it might be good if you have ABS, it might not, but what about the other guy that has no ABS in his car?  Do you think your studless snow tires will do anygood then?

As careful as you are, there is the other guys that aren't.  The other guys are the one that causes the accidents.  (follow the logic here)  When the other guy does something stupid, and you have no time other than to react, then the added traction that the studded tires gives you can be a lifesaver.

IF you cannot follow that logic and still feel that unstudded tires will save you and be "green" and you value not harming the roads above your own life and the lives of your loved ones, then I will personally nominate you for the Darwin, unless of course you have already reproduced.

 

DK

Wow... And now to the personal attacks. Have fun being angry and good luck driving next winter.

 I deal with people all day who say in essance, "I am responsible."  They never consider the "other" guy and usually it comes back and bites them, at other times they turn out to be the "other" guy. 

I get tired of it and get tired of explaining that it's the other guy you watch out and plan for.  Back when I was taking driver's ed, that is what they taught you under the guise of defensive driving.  They also taught common sense.

And, when people who don't consider the other guy that's when it comes back and bites them, that's the pure and simple fact.

And in an automobile the other fact is, accidents are not pretty.  And while it's not pretty hopefully it isn't fatal.  The problem with fatalities are, the fatalities are not usually the ones that cause the accident, it's usually the "other" (the one that isn't considering the other driver) guy.  At least if one or both have studded tires, there is a chance to avoid the fatality. 

To take that chance away is foolish and stupid and since Darwin offers awards for people who die in stupid ways, well it just follows those that argue against an extra measure of safety that might protect them is well, Darwin worthy.  And well Darwin doesn't allow awards for those that have passed along their genes they do offer honorable mentions. 

So, while you might consider this to be a personal attack, I thought I'd be generous and reward you and everyone for petitioning against studded tires. 

 

DK 

kenny63931:

Wow... And now to the personal attacks. Have fun being angry and good luck driving next winter.

Hey Kenny, I saw it coming  to that in Feb when DK got into a twist about how thousands would lose their jobs if studs were banned. Clearly he would rather distort what everyone has said about these useless tires and really doesn't want to be bothed with the facts. We really shouldn't bother him with these petty indifferences because he most likely has a kkk meeting to get to. My guess is he is the one filling your rearview mirror with the front of his pick up truck because anyone who makes it a practice of making panic stops is an aggressive driver and should not be on the road in the 1st place. Clearly this is an unhappy person who hates life and quite obviously is to lazy to chain up when he can't drive barefoot. He is so obsessed with people from CA maybe he should move there and fix everything. I hear property in Santa Barbara is going pretty cheap these days. Apparently Ronald Reagan's presidency was a total failure because he was from CA. Maybe we should give CA to Mexico and that would solve all our problems, hell then we could drive to AZ with our studed tires! Be safe out there and watch out for that 1970 Ford Pick up truck with studded tires tailgating ready for that looming panic stop; in July.

thedeanofmen:

anyone who makes it a practice of making panic stops is an aggressive driver and should not be on the road in the 1st place.

 

Or, it is someone who is trying to get a feel how a vehicle handles in an emergency situation.  Is it possible that car testers are included in your rant also?  Tell me, have you never "tested" your vehicle to see how it handles?  If not then I submit to you that those who do not have no business on the roads.

 

 As for the rest of your diatribe, I am looking foreward to the great flushing (tsunami) that is bound to happen on the WA coast.  I can only hope that it will happen during a hot summer weekend so all from Seattle and CA will also be flushed with the eyesores they call houses.

thedeanofmen:

Clearly this is an unhappy person who hates life and quite obviously is to lazy to chain up when he can't drive barefoot.

Do you chain-up when the temp dips below forty degrees, the same condition that forms ice on overpasses during the winter months? 

thedeanofmen:

he most likely has a kkk meeting to get to.

 So, disliking californicators makes me a racist now?  Interesting.  I bet you'd like to here from my lawyer...  Just to let you know, I don't hate life, I just hate stupid people including polliticians.  Doesn't matter race, creed, color, or sex.  I'm an equal opportunity hater. 

thedeanofmen:

He is so obsessed with people from CA maybe he should move there and fix everything.

Since I am already on the Napolitano's Right Wing Extremist list, I won't tell you what you can do with CA, albeit, I'm hoping the great flushing will take care of a majority of it.

thedeanofmen:

Maybe we should give CA to Mexico and that would solve all our problems,

 I'm glad you said that.  However, as I stated before, I'm willing to wait for the great flushing.

thedeanofmen:

how thousands would lose their jobs if studs were banned

As it turns out, the mighty O and his economics has made that point moot.  Of course he did save 160,000 jobs, at the expense of the other millions of jobs that are lost.  And speaking of the almighty O, all someone has to do is show how studded tires is good for the enviornment (it shouldn't be that hard due to the union workers making the studs), and they will be on his "green" list. 

DK

See how he makes my point for me.

DK threatening me with a lawer you sound like hardcore bed wetting liberal. Taking 2 or 3 words from my full ststement and twisting them to suit your agenda really makes you sound like a cry baby wuss liberal. Damn boy you sure you ain't really from San Fransico?! I bet your Prius driving kiester is there right now in your little loft over looking a tree with a spotted owl nest in it! LOL!! As much as you were bad mouthing the military a couple of post ago pretty much confirms that you are really raging liberal dismissing the rights of military personnnel. Extremists like you claim to be are extremly dangerous be you left or right. One is as likely as the other to fly an airplane into a building or build an IED in a u-haul truck

thedeanofmen:

Taking 2 or 3 words from my full ststement and twisting them to suit your agenda really makes you sound like a cry baby wuss liberal.

 

Cry baby wuss liberal....  LOL.   And your diatribe makes you sound like you lost all credibility you might have had.  Just because I have a right to defend myself against such slander is by no means confirming anything you have just written about me.  In fact your diatribe makes it sound like you are exactly what you're accusing me of.  First according to you I belong to the KKK and now I am a wuss liberal...   What's wrong, can't make-up your mind, or do you just insult people trying to see what sticks? 

By the way I do love your shotgun approach trying to discredit me and my views.  To bad it's of the fifth grade mentality.

 

thedeanofmen:

Extremists like you claim to be are extremly dangerous be you left or right. One is as likely as the other to fly an airplane into a building or build an IED in a u-haul truck

So, now your lumping me in with those who care nothing about human life?  You're as bad as England's Home Secretary Jacqui Smith when she lumped Michael Savage with murderers rapists and terrorists.  At least you can't ban me from the state of WA, like she banned Savage from England.  However the logic you use is the same as Janet Napolitano uses to put the vetrans of Iraqi and other VFW's on Extremists Watch list. 

thedeanofmen:

As much as you were bad mouthing the military a couple of post ago pretty much confirms that you are really raging liberal dismissing the rights of military personnnel.

When did I ever bad mouth the military?  I did thank them for their service and sacrifice to this country.  What I did was point out that they have no dog in this fight as they are only guests in this state.  Like all guests (unless the guest happens to be an illegal), they come they obey the laws and they go. Opinions are always welcomed but, why not let the citizens of the state fight about law and policy among themselves?   If they become a citizen of this state then of course that doesn't apply, and they are more than welcome to express their views on the future laws and policy. I have earned the right to my beliefs and views by being a veteran myself.

DK